Skip to main content

Why On Earth Would Apple Build A Television Set?


A number of sites are reporting that last year Apple killed plans to add a line of 4K TVs to its product range. Which beggars the question, who at Apple thought that this might be a good idea? It also tells us that Apple is clearly not scared of investing in the development of ideas that it is prepared to kill if they don't fit the company's business requirements.

Apple is mostly an iPhone business. It brings in such a large percentage of the company's revenue and profits that it is the most important thing they do. When the iPad came to market the feeling was that this was going to be as big and successful.

Five years on we know that isn't the case.


After its initial enormous growth the iPad stalled and then began a sales decline that continues today. Its possible that the decline began earlier than we see in the sales numbers because the release of the iPad Mini masked comparable sales performance.

Nonetheless, Apple must have known that the iPad wasn't going to be another star performer 12-18 months ago. I've talked about the reasons why that is the case before, primarily around use cases and purchasing routes and how they differ to a smartphone. The bottom line is that the usable life of an iPad is much longer than that of an iPhone and that stymies growth.

If the tablet market is mature then the market for televisions is drawing its pension. Despite the advent of new technologies and better manufacturing processes TVs are, pretty much, just TVs. Apart from the niche market of enthusiasts TVs are bought infrequently and on the basis of price versus performance metrics which firmly favour price. Once we buy a new TV we only replace it when it begins to fail, and TV technology is pretty reliable these days.

So if the tablet market is stagnating how would the TV market look at a new Apple 4K television? Apple never really sales close to the price end of the price v performance scale, narrowing its absolute market considerably, and whilst its Apple TV does a good job of making TVs smart, that's mostly down to its low price and ready availability.

For those individuals and business that do buy a top end Apple TV the upgrade sell is going to be difficult. Apple has committed itself to delivering feature upgrades to older hardware through its iOS and OS X programmes and TV buyers would be right to expect the same. Is this buyer really going to rush out and buy another Apple TV is three years time because it has a bigger screen or is lighter? Given that this has been all that Apple has been able to offer on the iPad that may prove to be a problem.

Logic dictates that a television set manufactured by Apple would prove to be less popular and hit peak sales much quicker than the iPad. For Apple it makes far more sense to keep pushing its hobby Apple TV (at very good profit levels) and let others do the hard slog of selling televisions.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

F1: Robert Kubica Impresses In Renault Test Run

The car may be old but its the performance of the driver that's the story here. Robert Kubica returned to F1, after a fashion, earlier this week with an extensive test run in a 2012 Lotus Renault F1 car at Valencia.
The age of the car and the circuit were likely determined by F1's current rules which ban testing, but the reason for Kubica being in the car is far more interesting. Considered by many to be a potential World Champion and certainly one of the fastest drivers of his generation, Kubica's F1 career seemed to be over after a 2011 crash whilst driving in the Rally of Andora. His Skoda Fabia was penetrated by a guardrail in the high speed accident partially severing his right arm.
Up until last year Kubica has been competing in rallying, with the expectation that the limited movement in his repaired arm would prohibit a return to single seater racing.
So this week's test is both interesting and confusing. Interesting because Kubica completed 115 laps of the ret…

F1: Robert Kubica's Williams Test Asks More Questions Than It Answers

Comparing driver's times at a tyre evaluation test like last week's Abu Dhabi event is difficult at the best of times, but when trying to assess the performance of a driver who has been out of the sport for six years, that difficulty level is raised even higher.
On the face of it Robert Kubica's test for Williams was a success. Fastest of the three Williams drivers present the headlines look promising. However, taking into consideration the different tyres used to set those times muddies the water considerably.
Kubica ran a three lap qualifying simulation on the new 'hyper-soft' tyre - which should have given him a two-second advantage. Correcting for tyres it would appear that Kubica was significantly slower than Sergei Sorotkin - who was on the harder 'soft' tyre - and marginally quicker than Lance Stroll, the team's only contracted driver.

Stroll's family fortune currently funds Williams, so there' no chance that he will be anywhere but in a…

Panos Panay's Defence Of Microsoft Surface Hardware Sounds Eerily Familiar

This weekend I went out with my ten year old daughter to select a laptop for her school year beginning in January. The schools requirements are quite specific, requiring a Windows 10 device, with a preference for a touchscreen and a stylus. She chose a Surface Pro, after trying a large number of different options. Having seen the way I use my own Surface Pro - and tried it herself there was only ever going to be two options - and the other was a Surface Laptop.
I tell you this so that you understand I am a buyer of Microsoft's products through choice, not compulsion. I'm on my third Surface device now. 
So when Panos Panay dismissed reports of the death of the Surface hardware line, I was very interested to see exactly how strong these denials were. Especially how they reflect what has gone before. To whit: Windows 10 Mobile.
Panay claimed that Microsoft is in hardware for the long haul. Almost exactly mirroring the words of Terry Myerson, when he claimed Windows Mobile was g…